Compare two different foods side-by-side by nutrients, energy, and quality scores.
The CSV contains energy and nutrients per 100 g for these two records only. Missing measurements remain blank rather than zero. Model scores and personal health conclusions are not exported.
Share your experiences or ask your questions.
Akçaağaç Şurubu (Grade A Saf) has a higher nutrition quality score (9) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
260 vs 304(+16.9%)
Score Diff
9 vs 2(-77.8%)
OVERALL WINNER
Akçaağaç Şurubu (Grade A Saf)
Higher energy
Akasya Balı
Score leader
Akçaağaç Şurubu (Grade A Saf)
Nutrient split
12 - 9 (tie: 0)
This chart shows energy per 100 g for both foods.
Each axis is normalized to 0-100; the outer shape indicates relative dominance on that nutrient.
Green/blue bars indicate first food advantage, orange bars indicate second food advantage.
Akçaağaç Şurubu (Grade A Saf) and Akasya Balı are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Akçaağaç Şurubu (Grade A Saf) has 260.0 kcal and Akasya Balı has 304.0 kcal. The difference is 44.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 9 and 2. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
21 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Akçaağaç Şurubu (Grade A Saf) | Akasya Balı | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.006 mg | — | — |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.088 mg | 0.038 mg | -56.8% |
| B6 Vitamini | — | 0.024 mg | — |
| Bakir | 0.049 mg | 0.036 mg | -26.5% |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | — | 0.5 mg | — |
| Demir | 0.11 mg | 0.42 mg | +281.8% |
| Diyet lifi | 0 g | 0.2 g | — |
| Folat DFE | — | 2 µg | — |
| Fosfor | 2 mg | 4 mg | +100.0% |
| Fruktoz | 1.24 g | 43.5 g | +3408.1% |
| Glikoz | 1.2 g | 29.8 g | +2383.3% |
| Kalsiyum | 102 mg | 6 mg | -94.1% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 67.04 g | 82.4 g | +22.9% |
| Kül | 0.47 g | 0.2 g | -57.4% |
| Magnezyum | 21 mg | 2 mg | -90.5% |
| Maltoz | — | 2.1 g | — |
| Mangan | 2.91 mg | 0.08 mg | -97.3% |
| Niasin | 0.081 mg | 0.12 mg | +48.1% |
| Pantotenik asit | 0.036 mg | — | — |
| Potasyum | 212 mg | 52 mg | -75.5% |
| Protein | 0.04 g | 0.3 g | +650.0% |
| Sakkaroz | 58 g | 1.9 g | -96.7% |
| Selenyum | — | 0.8 µg | — |
| Sodyum | 12 mg | 4 mg | -66.7% |
| Su | 32.39 g | 17.1 g | -47.2% |
| Toplam yağ | 0.06 g | 0 g | -100.0% |
| Toplam Şeker | 60.44 g | 82.1 g | +35.8% |
| Çinko | 1.47 mg | 0.22 mg | -85.0% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Akçaağaç Şurubu (Grade A Saf) and Akasya Balı.
Akçaağaç Şurubu (Grade A Saf) has less energy per 100 g (260 kcal versus 304 kcal).
For measured Fruktoz, Akçaağaç Şurubu (Grade A Saf) has 1.24 g and Akasya Balı has 43.5 g per 100 g. The table shows other nutrients separately.
The score summarizes this site's nutrient model. It does not establish that one food is healthier or suitable for everyone. Scores: Akçaağaç Şurubu (Grade A Saf) 9, Akasya Balı 2.
Energy and nutrient values in the table are per 100 g. Actual intake changes with serving size.
Data Sources
Records may come from different sources. Check each food page for source and preparation details; do not treat missing measurements as zero.
Analytical Methodology
The scoring algorithm is a scale of 100 based on nutrient density and macro/micro component balance.